Perental Responsibilty Laws Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Perental Responsibilty Laws - Research Paper ExampleFurther more, these liabilities do not intrude on the putting surface law responsibilities of the parents that are connected to the failure of parents averting a electric razors action that might be in both way harmful. Comparing the common law and the Parental responsibility laws, where the former does not put a parent accountable for their childs actions by design, the latter acts as a medium where it puts the parent this instant responsible for any minimum intentional damage caused by the child (Lehrer 2009). Combining it with sad justice, Sage (2009) mentions the duty of reckon view in which parents are liable for their childrens action if they have not adequately takeled the child. That is, if the control was adequate, they cannot be answerable. In such an instance, controlling the life of a child is limited to only fillet them from engaging in any criminal behavior. If the dos and donts are effectively controlled by t he parents, wherefore they are not responsible for the crime. According to Dr. Weatherburn (as cited in Loeber and Louber, 1986) in the US research, the criminal behavior is directly link up to the parental control. This research verbalise that the parent factors that make way to such crime embroil the likes of neglect, conflict and discipline, deviant parental behaviors and attitudes, and family disruption. The research also evinced that if the amount of neglected children rises to 1000, then the flesh of children involved in crime would increase to 256. Thus, with the positive relation revealed, it is eminent to control the above stated parental factors. However, these laws are not implied on the parents until their child reaches the age of 8 and 10. Also, the laws are no more applicable once the child crosses the age of majority which may differ with each border. This law low gear originated in the forties in the state of Hawaii. After 1846, it became one of the most widel y implemented laws those parents who were responsible for the intentional crimes of their children ended up following the statutes of civil liability (Weatherburn, 2004). After it originated in Hawaii, the first state to add to the law was Colorado in 1903. Since then, almost all of the states in the US have take such types of laws. The law divides the juvenile crime in two. One is the civil offense and the other is criminal in nature (Weatherburn, 2004). Considering the Australian courts, the Family Law Reform Act was applied in 1995 with several amendments. In 2006, a friendly parent provision was introduced that considered the overall relation each parent had with the other regarding the matters related to children (Benevolent society). As for UK, the first legislation was imposed in 1933 in which those parents whose child made an offence became the pass on of penalty. In Ireland, the willful ignorance of parents on the behalf of their children, thus, leading to criminal behavi or, is taken into consideration under the Children Act 2001 (Roth 2006). Therefore, by from the legislative measures in the above stated countries, it becomes evident that the significance of parent responsibility is becoming progressively important (Roth 2006). It also becomes apparent that these legislations have been a part of the above mentioned nations for long. However, there was one incident that really gave pace to fighting youth crime. In 1996, one Provenzino case caught the attention of the entire